WISC-IV VS.
RIAS: Will the
Real IQ Please
Stand Up!!
A 2-year study comparing the
two IQ instruments.
HYPOTHESIS
• RESEARCHER HYPOTHESIZED
THAT THE RIAS WOULD SCORE
HIGHER GIVEN THE
ADDITIONAL PSYCHOMOTOR
PROCESSING AND WORKING
MEMORY FACTORS ON THE
WISC-IV.
• PLEASE REFER TO THE GAI
DATA AND SUPPLENTAL
TABLES FOR WISC-IV UPDATES.
• ADDITIONALLY, BOTH
INSTRUMENTS MEASURE
DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTS.
THEREFORE, WE ARE
MEASURING SIMILAR YET
DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF
COGNITION. “SQUARE FEET VS.
CUBIC FEET” THINKING.
WISC and RIAS Verbal
Comparisons
• WISC
• 3 Subtests
• RIAS
• 2 Subtests
• General fund of
knowledge
• Verbal associative
reasoning
• Vocabulary –
expressive language
• Moral judgment,
common sense,
independent thinking
• General fund of
knowledge
• Verbal associative
reasoning
• Vocabulary – oneword responses
WISC and RIAS
Comparisons Performance
IQ
• WISC
• 3 Subtests
• Nonverbal
associative and
categorical
reasoning
• Analyze and
synthesize abstract
visual information
• RIAS
• 2 Subtests
• Nonverbal
associative and
categorical
reasoning
• Deduce essential
elements missing
in pictures from
gestalt
WISC and RIAS
Comparisons – Working
Memory
• WISC
• 2 Subtests
measuring attention,
concentration,
sequencing, and
short-term auditory
memory
• RIAS
• 0 Subtests
• Not part of the
CIX
WISC and RIAS
Comparisons – Processing
Speed
• WISC
• 2 Subtests
• RIAS
• 0 Subtests
• Graphomotor
processing speed
involving timed
paper and pencil
tasks
• Visual-motor
coordination
• Concentration and
visual memory
• Timed nonverbal
tasks involving
cognitive efficiency
and speed w/o paper
and pencil
DESIGN
Random Select Selection
• Select ‘fine’ Psychologists from St.
Johns County school district
randomly selected students ranging
from 6-16 years of age and
administered both the WISC-IV and
RIAS IQ instruments. All students
were referred by the CST.
• Abundance of data from the 200506 SY. Psychologists gave raw
data to researcher to tabulate.
DESIGN
• ONLY THE AGE OF THE
STUDENTS WAS USED AS
“PREDICTOR VARIABLE.” AGES
RANGED FROM 6-16. MAJORITY
OF STUDENTS WERE IN THE 7
YR. OLD THROUGH 10 YR. OLD
RANGE.
RACE AND GENDER NOT
USED FOR COMPARISONS
GIVEN LIMITED NUMBER
• Only less than a handful of minority
African American and Hispanics
tested.
• Gender not a major contributing
factor on how data is to be used.
Pearson Correlation
Coefficient
• The Full Scale IQ’s and the Factor
Scores will be compared to check
for correlation coefficients.
• WESSA.NET was used as the
software program to calculate
Pearson Product Moment
Correlation Coefficients.
TOTAL N = 121
BREAKDOWN BY AGE
N = Number
• 6 YEAR OLDS
09
• 7 YEAR OLDS
18
• 8 YEAR OLDS
33
• 9 YEAR OLDS
32
• 10 YEAR OLDS
18
• 11 YEAR OLDS
02
• 12 YEAR OLDS
02
• 13 – 16 YEAR OLDS
07
___________________________________
TOTAL SAMPLE N =
121
Standard score
Age 6 (9 students)
131
130
129
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
124 126
110
103
97 97
94
90
89
88
86
73
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
97
94
88
89
90
73
124
RIAS
97
110
103
86
126
Mean Factor Scores
Standard score
Age 7 (18 students)
139
138
137
136
135
134
133
132
131
130
129
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
135
121
99
105
104 106 106
99
97
92
85
71
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
99
106
92
97
99
71
121
RIAS
104
106
105
85
135
Mean Factor Scores
Standard score
Age 8 (33 students)
133
132
131
130
129
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
127 129
107
103
99
96
105
92
94
91
89
75
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
99
96
92
91
94
75
127
RIAS
103
107
105
89
129
Mean Factor Scores
Standard score
Age 9 (32 students)
132
131
130
129
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
128 128
101 101
99
103
102
96
94
91
79
71
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
99
101
91
94
96
71
128
RIAS
101
103
102
79
128
Mean Factor Scores
Standard score
Age 10 (18 students)
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
119
102
92 93
90
102
97
90
87
84
45
40
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
90
93
90
84
87
45
102
RIAS
92
102
97
40
119
Mean Factor Scores
Standard score
Ages 11 thru 16 (11 students)
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
124
104
93
92
91
84
82
80
76
76
63 61
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
84
80
76
82
76
63
104
RIAS
92
93
91
61
124
Mean Factor Scores
Standard score
All Ages 6-16 (121 students)
139
138
137
136
135
134
133
132
131
130
129
128
127
126
125
124
123
122
121
120
119
118
117
116
115
114
113
112
111
110
109
108
107
106
105
104
103
102
101
100
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
74
73
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
135
128
104
100
96
102
96
92
91
90
VIQ
PIQ
WM
PS
FSIQ
FSIQ Low
FSIQ High
WISC
96
96
90
91
92
45
128
RIAS
100
104
102
40
135
Mean Factor Scores
Correlations Between the
RIAS Index Scores and the
WISC-III IQ Scores –
Reynolds Manual pg. 105.
WISC-III IQ
RIAS
Index
Mean
IQ
Verbal IQ
Performance
IQ
Working
Memory
Processing
Speed
FSIQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
108.2 104.6
VIX
------ ------
107.8
102.1
.86
----
----
----
----
NIX 101.0
----
.33
----
----
----
CIX 100.3
----
----
----
----
.76
Pearson Correlations Between the
RIAS Index Scores and the WISC-IV
Factor Scores Ages 6 – 16 (N = 121)
WISC-IV IQ
RIAS Mean IQ
Index
Verbal
Comprehension
Perceptual
Organization
Working
Memory
Processing
Speed
FSIQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
96.2
95.8
89.7 90.7
92.2
VIX
99.9
.83
----
----
----
----
NIX
104.1
----
.54
----
----
----
CIX
101.6
----
----
.62
.45
.79
Pearson Correlations Between the
RIAS Index Scores and the WISC-IV
Factor Scores – Primary Grade
Ages 7 – 9 (N = 83)
WISC-IV IQ
RIAS Mean IQ
Index
Verbal
Comprehension
Perceptual
Organization
Working
Memory
Processing
Speed
Mean
IQ
Mean
IQ
Mean Mean
IQ
IQ
Mean
IQ
99.0
100.0 91.7 93.4
95.6
FSIQ
VIX
102.5
.83
----
----
----
----
NIX
105.4
----
.42
----
----
----
CIX
103.7
----
----
.58
.36
.75
Limitations of Study
• The sample was taken from students
already referred for assessment.
Approximately 90% were referred for
Special Needs/reevals and 10% for
Gifted evaluation.
• Majority of sample from 7-10 year old
range. Older MS/HS population not
adequately represented in sample.
• Majority of sample Caucasian and from
Middle Class SES. Minorities and/or
Low SES not adequately represented.
CONCLUSIONS
• RIAS tends to score approximately
10 points higher than the WISC-IV
on global cognitive ability measure.
• Strongest correlations between
RIAS VIX and WISC-IV VC of .83
followed by RIAS CIX and WISC-IV
FSIQ of .79 correlation.
• Weakest link between RIAS CIX
and WISC-IV PS of .45 correlation.
IMPLICATIONS
• The range of scores among all age groups
tends to favor the RIAS in regards to
scoring higher on both ends of the
distribution. This may influence ESE
placement decisions.
• Working Memory and Processing Speed
tends to depress the WISC FSIQ by
approximately 4 points. This may
influence ESE placement decisions.
• Even though RIAS scores higher on all
measures and through all age groups,
both instruments correlate fairly well with a
high degree of confidence when
comparing global IQ scores. This indicates
fairly good reliability and validity.
FUTURE
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Assess minority populations and
compare results with current data.
• Assess Low SES w/o regard for race
and compare with current data.
• Assess middle and high school
students to a larger extent.
• Assess pre-K students with WPPSIIII and RIAS and compare data.
Excerpt from Dr. Cecil
Reynolds e-mail …..
• It is clear the difference is really in the nonverbal
sections of the tests, just as we have argued for
some time. The WISC-IV in my view confounds
nonverbal intelligence with a host of tangentially
related factors (speed confounded with motor for
example, and the differential acquiescence of kids
.. to work as quickly as they can, etc.), especially
for referral samples wherein you also see a far
higher incidence of mild motor issues. I think the
RIAS gives a more accurate view of NV intelligence
for these kids and that seems to be your conclusion
as well—we do not see this difference in
nonreferred samples—random samples of normal
kids score at about the same level on both.
• Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD
• Professor of Educational Psychology
• Professor of Neuroscience